|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 17, 2024 19:47:26 GMT
50.7% EVs in China from a report in July this year. I see you left out that they will be building another 40 coal powered power stations over the next 2 or 3 years. And the wet flood basins they are building is too try and clear the crap they have made by extracting gold from e waste...
My list was of things they HAVE done. They need more energy because they make all the crap we buy, so its our Co2. Stop buying from China and own your Co2. No idea what you're guessing at with their flood basins. More made up bollox. And an image you got from Pinterest. Sigh. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 17, 2024 20:34:39 GMT
I see you left out that they will be building another 40 coal powered power stations over the next 2 or 3 years. And the wet flood basins they are building is too try and clear the crap they have made by extracting gold from e waste...
My list was of things they HAVE done. They need more energy because they make all the crap we buy, so its our Co2. Stop buying from China and own your Co2. No idea what you're guessing at with their flood basins. More made up bollox. And an image you got from Pinterest. Sigh. Let’s not and slow down our pace to net zero . We a build the infrastructure over a longer period and still get there. Our reduction of 2% can wait a bit longer . The floods of tears from virtue signallers will subside eventually. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Nov 17, 2024 21:19:37 GMT
My list was of things they HAVE done. They need more energy because they make all the crap we buy, so its our Co2. Stop buying from China and own your Co2. No idea what you're guessing at with their flood basins. More made up bollox. And an image you got from Pinterest. Sigh. Let’s not and slow down our pace to net zero . We a build the infrastructure over a longer period and still get there. Our reduction of 2% can wait a bit longer . The floods of tears from virtue signallers will subside eventually. If you just go with the free market principle, the industry will be highly competitive and get there a lot faster than the way Stalin Starmer wants. It's rather paradoxical. It's partly to do with human psychology. You force and you get people's backs up. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 17, 2024 21:25:58 GMT
Let’s not and slow down our pace to net zero . We a build the infrastructure over a longer period and still get there. Our reduction of 2% can wait a bit longer . The floods of tears from virtue signallers will subside eventually. If you just go with the free market principle, the industry will be highly competitive and get there a lot faster than the way Stalin Starmer wants. It's rather paradoxical. It's partly to do with human psychology. You force and you get people's backs up. That's easy to claim now the momentum has been achieved. We've known about climate change since 1970, I saw no sign of industry taking up the chalice. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 17, 2024 21:32:40 GMT
Let’s not and slow down our pace to net zero . We a build the infrastructure over a longer period and still get there. Our reduction of 2% can wait a bit longer . The floods of tears from virtue signallers will subside eventually. If you just go with the free market principle, the industry will be highly competitive and get there a lot faster than the way Stalin Starmer wants. It's rather paradoxical. It's partly to do with human psychology. You force and you get people's backs up. Yup. The “ let them eat cake “ and the “ it’s for your own good” brigades should not be allowed to lead the way to net zero.Its a disaster in waiting . |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 17, 2024 21:39:21 GMT
If you just go with the free market principle, the industry will be highly competitive and get there a lot faster than the way Stalin Starmer wants. It's rather paradoxical. It's partly to do with human psychology. You force and you get people's backs up. That's easy to claim now the momentum has been achieved. We've known about climate change since 1970, I saw no sign of industry taking up the chalice. No we didn’t . I remember the ‘ experts ‘ telling us that there was a new ice age coming in the 70s. Global warming catastrophe warnings started getting trsction when fatty Gore peddled in around the 90s and took root with his film in the early 21st century. Id argue that it’s only in the last 20 years that we have the technology to do something about it . |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Nov 17, 2024 21:42:47 GMT
If you just go with the free market principle, the industry will be highly competitive and get there a lot faster than the way Stalin Starmer wants. It's rather paradoxical. It's partly to do with human psychology. You force and you get people's backs up. That's easy to claim now the momentum has been achieved. We've known about climate change since 1970, I saw no sign of industry taking up the chalice. For a country that is supposedly a leader in green energy, you have to wonder why it does not own these wind farms. Most of that is coming from Norway which has got its act together in recent years in technology. Also over in China, they only really got going by the 80s and 90s. If it were left to British industry nothing would be achieved except huge losses. The projects would have been like HS2, Hinkley, Horizon where the thieves rip the money off us the tax payer. Even today, I hear the post office has a new computer system commissioned, initially at £114m, but now they tell them it will be one billion. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 17, 2024 22:14:08 GMT
[They need more energy because they make all the crap we buy, so its our Co2. Stop buying from China and own your Co2. No idea what you're guessing at with their flood basins. More made up bollox. And an image you got from Pinterest. Sigh. so - When we make goods and sell them to someone else, it's 'our CO2' that's emitted However, when Someone else makes goods and sells them to us, that's 'our CO2' being emitted as well and yet - we closed down our industrial base to reduce 'our CO2 emissions' |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 17, 2024 22:46:06 GMT
Not swapping any deaths, if we did not artificially create a demand for Lithium there would be no problem. As I said the CO2 harm is mostly in the heads of people like you, what we can see is better crop yields in Africa and more land able to grow useful crops. There is no evidence of any detrimental effect from the slight warming trend despite the desperation of some to find it. I favour allowing them to develop as they wish and not lay conditions for funding loans that kow tow to the AGW belief. But we artificially created the demand for car tyres, without the laws they would last twice as long. And again it comes from Australia. So this just falls into another poor attempt to diminish these brilliant new cars.
if they were 'brilliant' people would not need to be forced into buying them.. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Nov 17, 2024 23:38:20 GMT
I see you left out that they will be building another 40 coal powered power stations over the next 2 or 3 years. And the wet flood basins they are building is too try and clear the crap they have made by extracting gold from e waste...
My list was of things they HAVE done. They need more energy because they make all the crap we buy, so its our Co2. Stop buying from China and own your Co2. No idea what you're guessing at with their flood basins. More made up bollox. And an image you got from Pinterest. Sigh. China puts out more pollution than any other country in the modern world. It6's not made up bollocks. link.......You ask for links and then when they are supplied you state they are made up bollocks. Thats the last time I supply another link that you request.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Nov 18, 2024 2:24:29 GMT
These are old pictures.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Nov 18, 2024 6:46:15 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 18, 2024 7:38:25 GMT
Not swapping any deaths, if we did not artificially create a demand for Lithium there would be no problem. As I said the CO2 harm is mostly in the heads of people like you, what we can see is better crop yields in Africa and more land able to grow useful crops. There is no evidence of any detrimental effect from the slight warming trend despite the desperation of some to find it. I favour allowing them to develop as they wish and not lay conditions for funding loans that kow tow to the AGW belief. But we artificially created the demand for car tyres, without the laws they would last twice as long. And again it comes from Australia. So this just falls into another poor attempt to diminish these brilliant new cars. Everything as regards cars is a balance as regards efficient usage, safety, cost, demand, environmental impact and performance. EVs skew some of that balance through enforcing use and availability through legislation with a loss as regards pedestrian safety and other avenues of environmental impact all in the name of saving the planet from greenhouses gases. A belief system that becomes more discredited on a daily basis yet is held in thrall by too many of our political class. One suspects their adherence to the cause provides an excuse as to why they cannot make Britain work effectively as opposed to any continuing belief in the sinking cause. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 18, 2024 7:57:34 GMT
Are you saying that the government should not attempt to influence the car market for environmental or social reasons? That everybody should be allowed to drive whatever sort of vehicle they wish for as long and as far as they want as long as they can afford to pay for it, and the wider consequences can be simply ignored?
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 18, 2024 8:06:36 GMT
Are you saying that the government should not attempt to influence the car market for environmental or social reasons? That everybody should be allowed to drive whatever sort of vehicle they wish as long for as long and as far as they want as long as they can afford to pay for it, and the wider consequences can be simply ignored? No I m saying that the consensual balance adopted as regards all the factors controlling cars have been skewed by legislation that adheres to an emission target based on largely discredited work, a dodgy hypothesis and promoted by those with other agendas. One makes laws as regards tyres the balance is skewed to safety, one makes legislation as regards EVs then the balance is skewed to that dodgy belief of saving the planet as an example to others with a consequent increased risk to pedestrians and all the other environmental impacts associated with obtaining the raw materials. It is the first time legislation has been introduced by way of transport where the defined risk is that deaths will increase due to its enactment. |
|
